On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 7:30 AM, Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> wrote: > On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 01:55:54PM +0800, Zefan Li wrote: >> We should make the updating of this flag atomic. > >> /* Per-process atomic flags. */ >> #define PFA_NO_NEW_PRIVS 0x00000001 /* May not gain new privileges. */ >> +#define PFA_SPREAD_PAGE 0x00000002 /* Spread page cache over cpuset */ >> +#define PFA_SPREAD_SLAB 0x00000004 /* Spread some slab caches over cpuset >> */ > > Ooh, I was not ware we had those.. /me checks where that came from. Hmm > weird, while I did get that patch it had a seccomp prefix when landing > in my inbox so I ignored it. However the commit has a sched prefix > (which I would not have ignored). Dubious things happened here.
The series went through a lot of revisions, so it probably gained the sched prefix later in its life. Is there anything that needs changing about how this has been implemented? -Kees -- Kees Cook Chrome OS Security -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
